The Compliance and Technical Advisory Board voted in April 2025 to deny staff’s recommendation to allow a metal panel roof substitute at 507 Fir in the Monticello Park historic district, citing concerns about material authenticity, prior stop‑work orders on the property and the risk of setting a precedent for other homes in the neighborhood.

The denial came after public comment from neighborhood representatives and a site‑visit review of the material sample. Pam Carpenter, speaking on behalf of the Monticello Park Neighborhood Association, described 507 Fir as “designed by prominent architect Nathaniel Strauss Nayfock” and said the property’s clay tile roof makes it a contributing resource in the district. Carpenter told the board that the owner ignored a stop‑work order issued in January 2024 and that “all efforts to salvage the tile were lost.” She urged the board to deny the applicant’s request and said, “The roof should be replaced with inclined clay tile to uphold the material.”

Carmen Drury, the property owner, told the board she had been quoted about $20,000 to install the metal panel product under consideration and that a full clay tile replacement would cost “over $40,000.” Drury said she and her contractor were present to answer questions and that they had explored rear parking and other design options to address site constraints.

Commissioners who reviewed the physical sample during a design review committee site visit said the panel appeared too flat and did not convincingly imitate original clay tile. Commissioner Garcia said after viewing the sample: “I personally…do not believe this is a good substitute for the original material, and therefore I would not be able to approve this.” Other commissioners raised concerns that allowing the panel could set a precedent for nearby homes and noted that some neighbors had been required previously to reinstall clay tile.

After discussion, a motion to deny staff’s recommendation carried on a roll call vote: Davis, Flores, Garcia, Bergard, Setzer, Fullerton and Chairwoman Juanita Sepulveda voted in favor; Commissioner Pollock voted no. The board instructed the owner to work with staff on next steps and compliance requirements.

The board’s action addressed only the request before it — whether to accept the proposed metal panel as an appropriate substitute for original clay tile — and did not adopt any additional enforcement penalties at the hearing. Staff reminded the owner that a certificate of appropriateness and any required permits remain necessary before work may proceed.

The case record shows neighborhood correspondence and a design review committee report were part of the file; commissioners cited those materials and the physical sample during their deliberations. The owner was told to coordinate with Office of Historical Preservation staff to resolve outstanding compliance issues and to return with materials or revisions if needed.